New Delhi: The Supreme Court has held that when a government employee has a valid nominee for their General Provident Fund (GPF), authorities must release the entire amount to that nominee, even if it exceeds ₹5,000, without insisting on a succession certificate, probate, or letters of administration.

According to Live Law reports, a bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Manmohan dismissed a petition by the Union of India challenging a Calcutta High Court ruling that allowed the release of General Provident Fund dues to a nominee without requiring a succession certificate. The case arose after objections were raised over the payment of GPF dues to Paresh Chandra Mondal, the nominated brother of a deceased Central government employee.

The Union Government argued that under the Provident Funds Act, 1925, any GPF amount exceeding ₹5,000 requires legal certification before payment, even where there is a nominee. However, the Court rejected this view, observing that the ₹5,000 limit may have been significant in 1925 but has lost relevance after a century of inflation.

The Court relied on Rule 33(ii) of the General Provident Fund (Central Services) Rules, 1960, which clearly states that in cases of valid nomination, the amount must be released to the nominee regardless of the balance. Insisting on probate or certificates in such cases, the Court said, would defeat the purpose of having a nomination system and render it “meaningless”.

However, the Court clarified that a nominee is only a trustee of the amount and not the final owner. Other legal heirs may still raise claims before a competent court if they dispute entitlement.

The Court also noted that forcing the Government to insist on legal documents in every case would drag it into unnecessary private disputes over the estates of deceased employees, leading to prolonged litigation.

With these findings, the Supreme Court refused to interfere with the Calcutta High Court order and dismissed the Centre’s special leave petition.